ATF 3310.4 Question

[halifax]

An exempt customer DROSes a handgun on the 5th, returns and DROSes another handgun on the 11th.

Do I need to file an ATF Form 3310 if he picks them both up on the 21st? I'm thinking YES.

But NO if he picks one up on the 15th and the other one on the 21st.

Is this correct?

[EOD Guy]

I agree with you. I would think that the controlling factor would be the disposition date in your bound book.

[shark92651]

I think it is needed if the purchase of two or more is made on the same day or within 5 days - at least that is what it seems to say to me from reading bullet 2) on the instructions.

Hmmm, on closer examination I think I agree with you, the form has a "Date Transferred" field, not "Date Purchased".

[kemasa]

First off, the actual form you are talking about is a 3310.4, there are other 3310 forms :-).

The form is a bit vague as it talks about "acquire", which seems to be delivery.

Summary: No, you are not correct, you need to report it based on the dates you used.

In terms of the answer to your specific question, I would assume you are talking about 05-Feb-11 and 11-Feb-11 and pickup dates of 15-Feb-11 and 21-Feb-11 or picking both up on 21-Feb-11. In either case, you need to fill out the 3310.4 form since the person is acquiring 2 or more firearms in 5 consecutive BUSINESS days. If you increase the time between to be more than 5 consecutive business days, then you would not need to report it. A business day is generally viewed to be Monday through Friday, even though a FFL might be open for business on Saturday and/or Sunday.

My personal concern would be both the start timeframe and the delivery timeframe and would tend to report it if it was within 5 days on either side due to the use of the word "acquire". If it said delivery it would be different. The top of the form mentions "sale", not delivery, not acquire, as well.

The real joke is that the CA DOJ is aware of all the sales and notifies the BATF of multiple sales. BTW, a C&R FFL is NOT considered a licensee. I had a C&R FFL holder buy two C&R handguns and I did not report it because he had a license, but was told that it did not count and so I had to fill out all the forms. Now, this BATF inspector made other mistakes, so it is possible that is not actually the case, but ...

[halifax]

OK Thanks

[Mssr. Eleganté]

...BTW, a C&R FFL is NOT considered a licensee. I had a C&R FFL holder buy two C&R handguns and I did not report it because he had a license, but was told that it did not count and so I had to fill out all the forms. Now, this BATF inspector made other mistakes, so it is possible that is not actually the case, but ...

Yeah, your ATF inspector made a mistake. The law says Licensed Collectors are licensees with respect to any transactions in C&R firearms. Since ATF requires C&R FFLs to submit Forms 3310.4 when they dispose of multiple C&R handguns to non-licensees then it would be strange for ATF to say C&R FFLs are not licensees.

...The term "licensed dealer" means any dealer who is licensed under the provisions of this chapter...

...the term "licensed collector" means any such person licensed under the provisions of this chapter...

Q. I sold two curio or relic handguns from my collection to my next-door neighbor this morning. As a licensed collector of curios or relics, am I required to prepare and submit an ATF Form 3310.4, Report of Multiple Sales or Other Disposition of Handguns?

A. Yes, you must prepare and submit an ATF Form 3310.4 by the close of the business day on which the multiple sale or other disposition occurred. The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), as amended, mandates that all Federal firearms licensees, including licensed collectors, to file such reports as required.

[kemasa]

That inspector claimed that I was supposed to ship all my records in when I moved because I was issued a new FFL number (different area). I called the records dept. and was told that I could, but that it was not required. I have given the name and number of the person for the inspector to call, but for some strange reason the inspector did not want to call :-).

In thinking about it, the firearms might not have been C&R firearms, but the person was licensed and therefore exempt from the 1 gun per 30 days, so no report was required. Now I send the form in regardless. It is not like they don't already have the information since the CA DOJ gets it.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

...In thinking about it, the firearms might not have been C&R firearms, but the person was licensed and therefore exempt from the 1 gun per 30 days, so no report was required...

If the handguns are not C&R then you definitely need to send in the 3310.4. When a C&R FFL uses his FFL and COE combo to avoid California's 1 in 30 day rule on modern handguns he is not considered a "licensee" for that transaction by ATF. Even though California is granting the C&R FFL an exemption it doesn't change the fact that it is not a C&R transaction under the Gun Control Act.

[kemasa]

Yes, but the person is still a licensee, but you are saying that at times the person is not a licensee.

What if one of the firearms is a C&R?

[Mssr. Eleganté]

Yes, but the person is still a licensee, but you are saying that at times the person is not a licensee.

Federal law says a C&R FFL is only considered a licensee for the purposes of transactions in C&R firearms...

What if one of the firearms is a C&R?

C&R handguns would not count toward the total. So if the C&R FFL was acquiring 1 C&R handgun and 2 modern handguns then you would need to send in the Form 3310.4. But if he was acquiring 1 C&R handgun and 1 modern handgun then you would not need to send in the Form 3310.4.

[kemasa]

Interesting, thanks. I have to wonder if all inspectors would view it that way, but clearly they should.